Intel Warns Asia Over Linux Plan

rimbaldi writes "Intel's CEO, Craig Barrett recently warned the Chinese government that their attempt to create regional standards for computers and communications, including standards using Linux-based software, may be doomed to failure, since 'such a strategy might protect local companies and markets in the short term, [but] it would make it more difficult for Asian companies to participate in world markets.' This is in reaction to earlier Slashdot-covered stories about an Asian software consortium and China disallowing foreign software."

Comments

It makes sence..

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean.. who would want to lock himself into a market consisting of 1/8 of the world population!?.. ;) .. Gimme a break.. had it been Bulgaria or Sweden okay.. but China.. GL HF Intel!

Re:It makes sence..

[AllUsernamesAreGone]

Do not make the mistake of confusing ignorance with tactics, or that this is aimed at China. This is aimed squarely at western companies who may be interested in working with or investing in China - the same western companies whose bosses will attach significant weight to anything that issues from the mouth of a well-known CEO.

This isn't an attempt to put china off directly, it's an attempt to put western companies off working with China and lending weight to China's approach (which would surely be disasterous for Intel and Microsoft if it encouraged more countries to implement home-grown hardware and software rather than Wintel supported systems).

Intel Scared?

[yo5oy]

it is just really funny to see a multinational company watching out for the interests of one the largest potential new markets by stating that they won't be able to compete ten to twenty years from now. FUD.

Re:Intel Scared?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, you gotta feel for Wintel. China is a huge market, and I think everyone can agree the likes of the Dragon chip isn't part of Intel's plan. There be real competition there.

I can't see any real alternative for SE Asia. They surely don't want to be utterly behold'n to Microsoft/Intel. Two companies that seeming lie outside the reasonable care, custody, and control of the US's own Government let alone SE Asia.

Choosing WinTel isn't a features based purchase decision. It is a LONG term decision akin to choosing your nation's telephone standard. It *IS* a national security question, and its not just about worm 'o the day and "NSA" keys. Why, in all that is, would ANY country choose to pay a such long term economic tax to a foreign corporation that is above its own law? Worse, both Intel and Microsoft have PROVEN themselves uttery untrustworty.

So SE Asia buys into WinTel, they rend their US style path of death and destruction, and when China moves to stop them.... US Trade sanctions.

Yea. I'm sure they're lining up.

Computers/Software are THE core infrastructure of the modern economy. How would you the US would fare if every drop of oil was bought and sold by a single, say Iraqi, company? Secure? I think not, execpt for the fact we can, and will, bomb the S**T out of people to further our agendas.

Yet that is what WinTel would have for SE Asia. Every data bit locked into Wintel DRM and annual program rental fees. Effectively forever.

> You have to ask yourself this: is there an advantage to having a proprietary standard in your country?"

As always, the narrow edge is in the implementation. Linux is NOT a "proprietary standard" by any means. It could be made into one, in a defact sort of way, but Intel has assume a good deal in painting this as pure "protectionism" so soon. Yes, it may turn out that way.

Or not. Linux could be made better into what it aspires to be. A critical infrastructure on which ALL markets can communicate, troll free. Who better than the Asians to contribute their needs to such a platform?

Let it be also known to the poor Chinese that

[ThoreauHD]

the Internet will never work with open standards. That's just crazy talk. Crazy!

"proprietary standards"?

[Ikeya]

It's funny how Intel is saying that China would be creating "Proprietary" standards. Umm... how can they be proprietary if they're open source and built on linux? They won't be so "proprietary" if everyone can see their standards and work on interoperability... I would see this as more beneficial than locking themselves on closed proprietary systems. (albeit they are more widely used)

Re:"proprietary standards"?

[stratjakt]

Who says that they're going to be open source?

China has no copyright/patent/licensing treaties with the rest of the world.

They have as much respect for the GPL as they do the Windows EULA.

You call Bejing and demand that they make they're changes available via CVS. Remember, these are the same guys who ran kids over with tanks in Tiennamin square.

Article: -1 troll

[jbellis]

He's talking about chinese plans to try to grow their own (non x86) chip market through protectionist policies, not about "don't try linux it will never work!!!111"

The high costs of such a two-pronged approach would make it difficult to compete. "You have to ask yourself this: is there an advantage to having a proprietary standard in your country?" he added. To adopt unique regional technologies would mean "not participating in the rest of the world because you have a proprietary standard, and not being able to inter-operate with the rest of the world. I fail to see the benefit".

Even if you didn't read the rest of the article, it's clear he's talking about "proprietary standards," which linux clearly is not.

Furthermore,

In spite of warning about some methods used to promote homegrown technology champions in Asia, the Intel boss applauded efforts to stimulate a local software industry. He said this would be an important step in the region's fight against software pirates.

Missing the Point

[overshoot]

Intel is pushing -- hard -- for TCPA/Palladium/NGSCB/whatever. The idea is to make sure that non-TCPA systems are completely left out of the information ecology. With Intel, AMD, Microsoft, and IBM on board the fix is pretty much in.

Or it would be, if nobody like the Chinese got uppity. Planning to go with non-TCPA software is certainly Not Part of the Plan, and could derail all of Intel's plans.

That just can't be allowed now, can it?

Nothing really to see here

[finkployd]

I just read the whole article (no, I'm not new here) and it sounds to me like Intel is just telling China not to create proprietary regional standards that will not interoperate with the rest of the world. No mention of "don't use Linux" or "use microsoft and be happy", so off with the tin foil hats.

The interesting thought exercise is what happens if China and their massive population suddenly get their act together and emerge as a technological powerhouse? Then they can tell intel to conform to their standards or risk losing a giant revenue stream.

Finkployd

I think what Intel is saying

[HangingChad]

Is that the Chinese risk not recognizing DRM and other media control technologies. If 1/3 of the planet's population opts out, how are they ever going to be able to stuff digital rights management down the rest of our throats? The nerve of those people throwing a crimp in those carefully crafted plans! I somehow don't think the Chinese are going to lay awake nights worrying about being marginalized.

And of course Intel welcomes the Chinese production of high-quality, low-cost computer chips.

Translation:

[Kjella]

We intend to lock people into proprietary formats, preferably DRM encumbered so we may legally keep others from creating compatible programs or import filters so you can use alternative OSs.

Microsoft is working very hard to keep there from being a "critical mass" of people using alternatives, so that everyone "muat" buy Windows/Office because that's what everybody else uses. Once people start expecting compatibility with "everyone", where everyone includes Linux, the game is already half lost. Regardless of whether they actually use Linux at that time, Microsoft doesn't want to give that alternative, simply because it hurts those running Linux who can't communicate properly with Windows users far more than the other way around.

Kjella

Re:Or maybe Intel is worried about...

[greylion3]

The parent to this comment has an extremely good point - without Linux, they would have to start from scratch writing an OS for their new chip.
With Linux, all they have to do is write a good compiler.

Personally, I'm glad to see an unbiased, ....

[burgburgburg]

reasonable point of view about this issue. I believe that Barret is honestly and forthrightly expressing good advice, unburdened with personal aspirations or concerns. I believe that aliens have been stealing spaceships full of Gouda cheese as weapons against the Ant People of Sector Omega. I hope that people can give Mr. Barret the benefit of the doubt that he is trying to use his experience to help the governments of Asia on this important issue.

Intel Loves Microsoft? Hardly

[Glasswire]

Despite a long-standing and profitable relationship which constrains public friction, Intel and Microsoft have often had battles of varing seriousness on a bunch of topics...

Intel has been / is mad at Microsoft about:
- Constant attempts over the years to generalize their OSes to other processor archectures (NT on Alpha/MIPs, Pocket PC on all sorts of non-Intel (non X-scale) cpus and, of course, x86-64 and the eventual cpu independent version of .Net)
- Blocking Intel on hardware standards and initiatives
- Microsoft dragging it's feet about supporting new hardware features in the OS (eg USB on NT (never really), Hyperthreading (2 years) and Itanium Architecture (Linux had IA64 up and running 3 years before Ms)
-Microsoft's attempt to position Intel cpus as just another processor they support.

Microsoft has been / is mad at Intel about:
- Intel's general support of Linux in general including founding and funding the Open Source Development Lab (where Linus and Andrew are employed now)
- Intel's support of HP in running HP-UX on Itanium and Intel's historic support for Novell Netware, Solaris, Unixware and other Unices
-Support for OS-independent management and other hardware APIs that let other OSes get parity or better with Windows
-Occasionally making end-users aware of the prickly truth that the cost advantage of "Wintel" vs big RISC UNIX is all Intel hardware economics which makes the solution cheaper in spite of the greater cost of the Ms software
-Intel's attempt to position Windows as just another OS they support.